Monday, December 29, 2014

We have
been talking a lot about our transportation funding needs and shortfall between
now and 2040 – for Ada and Canyon Counties we project $359 million in annual
transportation funding needs, but
only $200 million in annual transportation funding,
for a shortfall of $159 million per year.

You are
probably aware that COMPASS supports increasing transportation funding to help
bridge this gap, and that the transportation funding issue will likely be discussed
in depth at both the state and federal levels in 2015. I encourage you to be
part of that conversation; however, I know it can be difficult to do that
without first understanding where the money comes from now. Let me try to shed
some light…

Simply put, funding for
our transportation system is first collected through taxes by various branches
of our government, then distributed to transportation agencies to maintain and
improve our transportation system. Transportation funding is designed to
primarily be a user-pay system, with the majority of the money coming from fuel
taxes. The concept is simple: the more you drive, the more fuel you use, the
more you pay in fuel tax. That tax, in turn, is used to build and maintain the
transportation system.

However,
once we move beyond the very basics, it gets complicated quickly.

Where does transportation funding come
from, and who collects it?

As I mentioned above, most transportation funding
comes directly from transportation “users” through fuel taxes, as well as
registration fees, impact fees (fees paid by developers to offset costs due to
growth), and public transportation fares. Some funding also comes from more
general taxes, such as property taxes.

Fuel
taxes are collected by both the federal government (18 cents per gallon for
gasoline and 24 cents per gallon for diesel) and the State of Idaho (25 cents
per gallon for both gas and diesel). It is important to note that these amounts
have not changed since the mid-1990s and do not change with the price of
fuel. Because the tax rates have remained unchanged for 20 years, they have not
kept pace with inflation. This, combined with more fuel efficient vehicles and
national trends that show that people are driving less, means that the
“user-pay” concept isn’t working as it once was. Costs are continuing to
increase, but the funds to pay for those expenses are not.

Vehicle
registration fees are collected by the Ada County Highway District (ACHD),
through a local option registration fee approved by voters, and by the State of
Idaho. Valley Regional Transit and ACHD Commuteride both collect fares from
users, and ACHD and the City of Nampa both also levy transportation impact fees
on new development. In addition, local municipalities can use a portion of
property taxes to pay for transportation infrastructure and services. Valley
Regional Transit operations are mainly supported by local cities, primarily
from property taxes.

How is transportation funding spent, and
by whom?

Here is
where things get really complicated. Unfortunately, there isn’t just one “pot”
of transportation money to draw from. Each of the different types of taxes,
above, have strings attached that limit how they can be spent. In addition, in some
cases funding is further divided into different funding “silos,” even within
one funding source. I’ve highlighted just a few examples below to give you a
feel for how this works.

Federal
Fuel Tax: Fuel taxes
collected by the federal government are returned to the states. Idaho is in the
enviable position of receiving more back from federal fuel tax than it pays in
– at least $1.50 for every $1 contributed. A portion of the federal funding
that comes to Idaho is specifically for the Idaho Transportation Department to
use on state managed highways. The rest of the funding is for use by local
transportation departments, based on size – some funding is for rural areas,
some is for small urban areas, some is specifically for the “Boise Urbanized
Area” (basically northern Ada County). Some of those funding “silos” are
further divided, with specific funding allocated for safety, for bridges, for public
transportation, for roads, etc.

State
of Idaho Fuel Tax:
Funding from this tax is divided between the Idaho Transportation Department to
fund state highways and local transportation departments (cities and highway
districts) to fund local roads. Per the Idaho constitution, fuel taxes cannot
be used to fund public transportation, leaving Idaho without dedicated public
transportation funding.

Impact
Fees: These fees,
collected from developers in the City of Nampa and within Ada County, can only
be used for transportation projects related to new development, and cannot be
used for maintenance or operating costs. For example, impact fees could be used
to add stoplights to accommodate increased traffic, but not to pay snow plow
drivers. The specifics of how these fees can and cannot be used is spelled out
in state law. It’s important to note that those fees do not have to be used at
the exact site of the development; they can be used for traffic improvements to
address growth-related challenges within the jurisdiction of the agency that
collected the fees, based on specific criteria.

So, what does all this mean to me?

You will
undoubtedly hear more about transportation funding at both the state and
federal levels over the coming months. As you form your opinions on what should
be done, keep the following points in mind:

The
current system of funding our transportation system primarily with gas taxes no
longer works as intended.
Something needs to change. This may be raising the gas tax, augmenting the gas
tax with additional funding mechanisms, or changing our expectations of what
our transportation system should do for us…basically, consciously choosing to
forgo maintenance and not expand to accommodate growth. Personally, I think it
will take a combination of all of these.

The
“silo” issue needs to be part of the discussion when looking at transportation
funding options:

We
can’t simply move money around to solve our funding problems. I’ve heard people say, “I don’t want X; spend the money on Y instead.” That often simply isn’t
possible. For example, if we want to widen I-84, we can’t simply take our “public
transportation” money and put it toward widening the interstate. Or, we may
have federal money we can use to buy more buses, but we don’t have enough money
for the fuel to operate them. We can’t simply use the money designated for
buying buses to pay for fuel. Within the current system, our funding can only
be used within the appropriate “silos.”

Funding
a more robust transportation system isn’t just about raising more money; it’s also
about raising money that can be used to meet identified needs. As we explore new
funding mechanisms or increasing the amount we collect from current sources, moving
away from “silos” would provide flexibility to allow an individual jurisdiction
to use transportation funding to best meet its transportation needs, whatever
those may be.

Wednesday, December 17, 2014

We talk a lot about providing a more
multi-modal transportation system, and I am frequently asked if we are making
any progress. I can answer with a resounding, “yes”: we are making progress.
You don’t need to look any further than this year’s Leadership in Motion award
winners to see that we are definitely making strides in that direction.

The projects, organizations, and people
honored at this year’s awards presentation reflect the spectrum of
transportation options – roadways, transit, and bicycles and pedestrians. In
addition, we honored the Boise Urban Garden School (BUGS) – an organization
seemingly outside the transportation “world,” but whose work with youth on
gardening and healthy, active living soundly supports the goals and vision of Communities in Motion 2040, the regional
long-range transportation plan for Ada and Canyon Counties.

While our winners are diverse, what they
all have in common is a look toward the future. The individuals, agencies, and
organizations have all looked beyond “what is” to “what could be,” and the
Treasure Valley is, and will be, a better place for it. We are all indebted to
these leaders for their foresight and fortitude to make our lives better.

Community Planning Association of Southwest Idaho

COMPASS is the designated Metropolitan Planning Organization responsible for transportation planning in Ada and Canyon Counties. The COMPASS Board comprises 39 members representing the cities, counties, highway districts, educational institutions, state agencies, and other entities within the two counties. COMPASS plays an important role in making decisions about future long-range transportation needs in the Treasure Valley, taking into consideration environmental and economic factors that affect the quality of life.

Subscribe to Blog

Matt Stoll, Executive Director

Matt Stoll has been the Executive Director of the Community Planning Association of Southwest Idaho (COMPASS) since 2004. Under Matt’s direction, COMPASS has focused on developing and retaining collaborative and cooperative partnerships with local, state, and federal planning agencies and with Treasure Valley communities.

Matt has a Bachelor of Arts degree in geography from the State Univer­sity of New York and a Master of Arts degree in geography from Arizona State University. He is married with two daughters and is active in the Treasure Valley com­munity through his involvement in volunteer and non-profit organizations.

By contributing to this Blog, you give COMPASS worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive right to use, display, modify, and distribute any post, in any form. If you are under 18, get a parent's or guardian's permission before posting.